Caswell A
Medical Journal of Australia, Kingsgrove, NSW.
Med J Aust. 1992 Jul 6;157(1):63-4.
To evaluate correspondence published in The Medical Journal of Australia, with particular emphasis on the level of post-publication peer review which it represented.
An audit of all letters submitted to the Journal for publication in 1991.
Six hundred and forty-eight letters were received; 506 (78%) were published and 142 (22%) were not. Three hundred and twenty-nine of the published letters were written in response to material published in the Journal: 96 of these were related to other letters, 71 were replies to other letters by authors, 43 related to original articles, 42 to leading articles and 77 to other articles. Approximately 20% of all original articles published in the Journal attracted correspondence which was published. The commonest reasons for writing were concern about possible flaws in the design of a study, to add information of interest to the subject or to criticise the conclusions reached in the study.
Readers are perhaps not taking full advantage of the opportunity for post-publication peer review provided by correspondence columns in the MJA.
评估发表在《澳大利亚医学杂志》上的读者来信，尤其着重于其所代表的发表后同行评议水平。
对1991年提交给该杂志以供发表的所有信件进行审核。
共收到648封信；506封（78%）被发表，142封（22%）未被发表。已发表的信件中有329封是针对该杂志上发表的内容所写：其中96封与其他信件相关，71封是作者对其他信件的回复，43封与原创文章相关，42封与社论文章相关，77封与其他文章相关。该杂志发表的所有原创文章中约20%引发了被发表的读者来信。写信的最常见原因是担心研究设计可能存在缺陷、补充该主题有趣的信息或批评研究所得出的结论。
读者可能没有充分利用《澳大利亚医学杂志》读者来信专栏所提供的发表后同行评议机会。
